Center for Advanced Studies – South East Europe

Davide Pala

Experts, Good Citizens, Democratic Public Debates and Global Warming

“Among climate experts there is an overwhelming consensus that (i) global warming is occurring, that (ii) this fact is alarming and that (iii) humans are causally responsible for it. Despite this, 16% of American citizens deny that (i) global warming is occurring, 48% of them question (ii) its seriousness, and 50% think that (iii) human activity has no role in causing it (Anderson 2011). These discrepancies can be observed in many other countries as well.

In this talk I will provide a normative framework to assess the attitude of those citizens that, like American citizens, in democratic public debates concerning the elaboration of public policies, mistrust experts,  i.e.  trustworthy  epistemic  authorities,  in  regard  to  beliefs  that  are  justified and  almost undisputed within the scientific community. I will argue that this attitude is bad, because citizens that show it do not possess the virtue of the epistemic trust in trustworthy epistemic authorities (ETITEA), which is demanded by the non-exhaustive ideal of the good citizens publicly debating in democratic contexts. According  to  this  non-exhaustive  ideal,  as  a  necessary  but  not  sufficient condition,  in democratic public debates citizens trust trustworthy epistemic authorities as a way to respect themselves and each other as peers in circumstances of epistemic dependence. In more detail, I will show that the virtue of ETITEA is required by three ideas specifying the non-exhaustive ideal of the good citizens publicly debating in democratic contexts, i.e. (i) the idea of rational citizens, (ii) the idea of reasonable citizens, and (iii) the idea of responsible citizens.

First, ETITEA is demanded by the idea of rational citizens (i). Rational citizens normally want to believe justified beliefs. Moreover, they want to act successfully, and know that justified beliefs lead to successful actions more than unjustified beliefs. Yet rational citizens know that in most domains, i.e. all domains in which they are not experts, they do not have first-hand evidence justifying the related beliefs, and cannot even acquire the expertise necessary to understand either the evidence or the claims relative to the evidence. In the light of this, rational citizens dismiss the idea of epistemic independence as irrational, acknowledge their epistemic dependence, and show trust in trustworthy epistemic authorities and their claims. In this way they can rationally hold beliefs in domains in which they are not experts, successfully act on their basis, and show respect to themselves.

Second, ETITEA is required by the idea of reasonable citizens (ii). On the one hand, reasonable citizens respect a reciprocity constraint, therefore they restrain themselves from publicly advancing unjustified and highly sectarian beliefs, because they do not meet almost uncontroversial scientific standards and would not be endorsed by everyone. On the other, reasonable citizens accept, among the burdens of judgement, the fact of epistemic dependence on epistemic authorities as a condition that all citizens (more or less) equally share. Both features lead reasonable citizens to acknowledge the need of ETITEA as a way to respect each other as peers in circumstances of epistemic dependence.

Third, ETITEA is demanded by the idea of responsible citizens (iii). Responsible citizens do not want to unduly harm others and know that public policies based on unjustified beliefs likely harm others. Also, they are aware that they cannot autonomously shape justified beliefs in those domains in which they have no direct expertise. Responsible citizens, therefore, in public debates concerning the elaboration of public policies show trust in trustworthy epistemic authorities in those domains in which they are laypersons. This is a way to respect both co-citizens and citizens of other countries.

Having elaborated this normative framework, I will employ it to assess the public mistrusting attitude  showed,  within  democratic  contexts,  by  citizens  toward  those  trustworthy  epistemic authorities addressing global warming, and argue that it is bad because it shows a lack of rationality, reasonableness, and responsibility. Finally, I will outline some public and feasible strategies that should be used to modify this bad attitude.”


Davide Pala is a Post-doc Fellow at the CAS-SEE of Rijeka. Previously he was a Post-doc Fellow at the “Fondazione Burzio” of Turin and a PhD Student at the University of Turin, in the Department of Cultures, Politics and Society. He was Visiting Post-doc Fellow at the University of Frankfurt (Justitia Amplificata) and at the University of Manchester (Mancept). He works in the field of normative political theory applied to international issues. In particular, his research focuses on global justice, world poverty and economic inequalities. On the matter he wrote several articles focused on institutional cosmopolitanism, capability approach, legal positivism and nationalism. He is currently developing a normative republican account of world poverty.

CARLO BURELLI

The Pure Normativity of Realism

“In this paper, I investigate the question of whether realism can provide a substantive normative standard to evaluate institutions. While classical realists focus on the individual dimension of political actors and their freedoms and responsibilities, many contemporary realists adopt broadly liberal values for political institutions. Drawing from discussions about the realistic conception of politics, I defend a functional understanding of politics as selection and implementation of collective decisions within a social group. A functional normative standard can then be derived: political institutions are ‘good’ when they adequately perform this function, independently of their moral qualities, in the same way a ‘good soldier’ is someone who is good at fighting (its function), independently of whether he is a good man. This normative standard is independent from morality and internal to politics. If being a good man requires abstaining from violence, one cannot be a good man (in the moral sense) and a good soldier (in the functional sense), similarly to how Machiavelli claimed that a good Christian cannot be a good politician. Realists not only claim this independence of politics, but often also its priority. The political function is vital, because it is required to preserve the survival of the social group and its individuals. This is the ‘pure’ normative dimension of political realism, which takes priority – but not exclusivity – over other moral considerations, and is thus ‘the first virtue of political institutions’ because those which do not express it cannot sustain themselves through time.”


Carlo Burelli is a current CAS Fellow at the University of Rijeka, where he works on a realistic theory of order, as the first virtue of political institutions. Previously, he had a two year Post-Doc Fellowship in the ERC Project REScEU where he investigated political conflicts and realistic forms of solidarity. He received his PhD in 2015 from Università Statale di Milano defending the thesis: “The Normative Power of Necessity: Making Sense of Political Realism”. In 2014, he was a visiting PhD at the University of Cambridge under Raymond Geuss. He has written articles on Political Realism (Towards a Realistic Conception of Politics, 2017), Solidarity (Realistic Solidarity for the Real EU, 2016) and the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes (Lex Facit Veritatem, 2015; Subjectivity is Objective, 2017). He is also the author of a short monograph on game theoretic interpretations of Hobbes’s “state of nature” (E fu lo Stato, 2010).

Natasha Jankovic

Architectural terRI(s)tories[1]:
mapping the process of city transformation

[1] Architectural stories about Rijeka’s territory

“Architecture represents one of the possible ways of how territory can be marked, but it is also a permanent trace of the process of its development. As a built form it is a sign in the ground, while as an idea it represents a trace of various approaches to its development within theoretical field. This research examines the significance and meaning of a single architectural gesture within the context of architectural narrative of the city territory by starting from the structural approach to observation of the territory and the method of post-structuralist analysis.
This research links and analyses: 1) the importance of the architectural gesture in the process of defining and developing the territory of the city, through 2) changing position from the phenomenological (formal, formative) to critical discourse of observing architecture, which examines 3) the potential of the interpretative narrative both of the architecture and the territory. With approach based on semantics and metaphors, the aim of the research of the territory and architecture as an element of its structure, is to ‘read’ some of the layers of the city (terRI[s]tories), which is considered as a cultural palimpsest, through processes and material layers of its changes and development.
This theoretical background and methodological apparatus was used in order do re-write 20.20 stoRIes of Rijeka (20 terRI(s)tories – Architectural stories about Rijeka’s territory from 20th century). More precise 20 terRI(s)tories as spatial sequencesfrom the period between 1920th (the year of Rijeka’s autonomy) and 2020th (the year when Rijeka will be European Capital of Culture) thematically grouped into different chapters were mapped with the aim of presenting some of the scapes – scenery views:  socialscapepowerscapevisionscapealterscapememoryscape and spaces of porosity (within differentscapes) of the Rijeka’s territory transformation. Reading of the terRI(s)tories should examine the potential of spatial narrativity within specific spatio-temporal context for a re-wRIting of a new stoRIes with(out) words or (new) objects by using of existingspatial sequences for future conceptions and actions.”

Natasha Jankovic is an architect, working in the filed of research, practice and education, currently in the position of research and teaching associate of the University of Belgrade – Faculty of Architecture,  where she obtained her PhD. So far, her particular research interests is given to the topic of the relationship between architecture and territory, architecture and nature, as well as city territory transformation. Publishes professional and scientific papers in national and international journals, books and conference proceedings. Participates in national and international exhibitions and architectural and urban competitions. Living in urban environments, she seeks to read some of the terri(s)tories (architectural inscriptions within the territory, written through architecture as a code of city structure) that serves as a document about the past processes of development; but she also wishes to mark the territory: by making an architectural gesture in a natural environment, in order to write some new terri(S)tory.

Call for Papers: 2018 CAS SEE Summer School

Critique of Violence Now: From Thinking to Acting against Violence
Rijeka, June 18 – 22, 2018

Guest lecturers:

Judith Butler, Berkeley University

Hervé Le Brass, Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris

Peter Fenves, Northwestern University

Alexis Nuselovici-Nouss, University of Aix-Marseille, Fondation Maison des sciences de l’homme

Astrid Deuber-Mankowsky, Ruhr University Bochum

Marc Crepon, Ecole normale supérieure, Paris

Rationale and background:

The 2018 CAS SEE Summer School examines one of today’s most pressing topics: how to think and what to do with violence in our present society. To what extent is it possible to deconstruct and name emerging mechanisms of violence? What are the kinds of phenomena that escalate coercion and violence, making it difficult to either contain them or to work out feasible alternatives? Assuming that violence in the various social contexts is not a self-contained, but rather a relational/social phenomenon (across various social entities and institutions such as families, associations, corporations, nations, states, religions), is there any social purpose of violence, and is there any productive alternative to violence? Is violence a form of communication, and are there substitutes in terms of strategies of communication that might non-repressively reduce the recourse to violence?

Southeastern Europe has seen more than its share of violence, as well as of anti-violence ideology over the past several decades, propagated both by the states and governments and by civil society organizations and various sections of the society. The region has seen the adoption and implementation of various EU laws and policies to a far greater and more extreme level than they were implemented in their countries of origin. The trend is partly a symptom of identity crisis and identity insecurity, where policies are designed to curtail all kinds of violence in society, shifting power towards every increasing prerogatives of the administration. Every instance of violence tends to be interpreted as a systematic social degeneration, which needs to be uprooted by draconian control and repressive policies. The results include an extremely powerful police force and state institutions with sweeping authority over individual citizens, and an increasing apathy and defensiveness by the ordinary people. Thus the study of violence as well as anti-violence policy addresses a core issue for the quality of life in Southeastern Europe.

“Critique of Violence Now” will:

  • Provide a framework for exchange of views and insights among activists and academics on following topics: Political Violence, Administrative Violence, Legal Violence, Domestic Violence, Collective Violence in the regional and global context, Countering (discourses of) violence through social engagement, Social inequalities and neoliberal conquest of state and society;
  • Inspire and build capacity of participants through stimulating topical and theoretical input by renowned academics, creating opportunities for building networks and joint cooperation actions in the field;
  • Provide workspaces for the participants to discuss and work on short papers (app. 3 pages) dedicated to four major clusters: “Political Violence: Revisited”; “Administrative Violence: Migration”; “Ethnicized and Racialised Violence”; “Deconstructing Misogyny and Patriarchy”. Papers (in English) would be further refined immediately after the Summer School and published in a volume edited by the Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory University of Belgrade.

Technical information and application procedure:

The official language of the Summer School is English.

The Program Committee of the 2018 CAS SEE Summer School will select the presenters based on the submitted abstracts responding to four Clusters:

  • “Political Violence: Revisited”;
  • “Administrative Violence: Migration”;
  • “Ethnicized and Racialized Violence”;
  • “Deconstructing Misogyny and Patriarchy”

We kindly ask you to put the following title in your email subject: ‘Name: title of the paper’. The complete application should be submitted in.doc or .docx format, and must contain: the title of the presentation, an abstract of up to 200 words, key words and a short biography in English.

Summer School applications should be sent only via e-mail to the following address: cas@cas.uniri.hr

Deadline for abstracts is 31st March 2018.

It is expected that the participants submit their full papers before 1st June 2018.

2018 CAS SEE Summer School Full Registration Fee is 125 Euros; Student Registration Fee is 100 Euros.

Payment is due before 1st June 2018.

The Summer School hosts offer reception and the ticket entrance for the theatre performance on June 18th in the evening, and provide refreshments throughout the duration of the Summer School program.

Important dates:

Application deadline: 31st March 2018

Notification of acceptance: 30th April 2018

2018 CAS SEE Summer School dates: 18th–22nd June 2018

Program Committee:

Astrid Deuber-Mankowsky, Ruhr University Bochum

Petar Bojanic, IFDT University of Belgrade / CAS SEE University of Rijeka

Vedran Dzihic, oiip / CAS SEE University of Rijeka

Manuela Bojadzijev, Humboldt University

Sanja Bojanic, CAS SEE/CWS, University of Rijeka

Adriana Zaharijevic, IFDT, University of Belgrade

Gazela Pudar Drasko, IFDT, University of Belgrade

Organization Board:

Mónica Cano Abadía, Kristina Smoljanovic, Marko-Luka Zubcic, (CAS SEE University of Rijeka)

For information on the time schedule, organization and future events, please follow us on the official website and the Facebook page.

If any further details are needed, please contact us at: cas@cas.uniri.hr

2018-2019 CAS SEE FELLOWSHIP RECIPIENTS

The Center for Advanced Studies – Southeast Europe (CAS SEE) at the University of Rijeka is pleased to announce the recipients of the 2018/2019 CAS SEE Fellowship Awards.

The purpose of the CAS SEE Fellowship Programme is to further the research or creative work in the humanities and humanistic social sciences in the Balkans. Fellows will present their work within the CAS-Collegium on a bi-weekly basis, creating an intellectually heterogeneous atmosphere and fostering a productive self-examination and even friction, which may lead to new and unexpected ideas and innovation.

Please join us in congratulating the following 2018-2019 Spring CAS-SEE Fellowship Awards, University of Rijeka recipients:

Filip Milacic (Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany) – The emergence of identity politics cleavage and its effect on social movements

Tiziano Toracca (University of Perugia, Italy; University of Ghent, Belgium) – Metamorphosis of Labour. The Movement for a Basic Income in the Light of the Modern Paradigm of Labour

Francesca  Forlè  (Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Italy) – Rythmòs in Acting Together. Reinforcing Joint Actions, Improving Stability, and Orienting Power Hierarchies

Daniela Brasil (Bauhaus-Universität Weimar, Germany) – Emancipatory Learning: New Schools and Artistic Platforms for Social Change

Polona Sitar (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia) – Global Menstrual Movements as New Forms of Social Engagement

Barbara Turk Niskac (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia) – “Life is all about work”: Growing Food as Lifestyle Politics

Pavao Zitko (University of Perugia, Italy) – Ultramodern Man as a State of Consciousness

The 7th generation of fellows will start their collaboration with a working meeting scheduled for 23 February, 2018 at the University or Rijeka.

The 2018-2019 Spring CAS SEE Fellowship Awards winners will be announced on March 19, 2018 at a public event following the 5th anniversary of the Center for Advanced Studies founding at the University of Rijeka.

FASHION WEEK WINTER 2017

Fashion Week is a seasonal showcase of the Sweet and Salt flagship, which is a part of a project Rijeka – European Capital of Culture 2020, presenting us with themes, concepts, works, plans and cooperative developments connected to the understanding and designing the future city through the context of Rijeka and the S&S territory. This year’s event took place 19th – 21st December at the DeltaLab, presently situated in the exIvex building, and its themes were the reinvention of Delta Hood and the introduction of the newly formed DeltaLab.

FW2017 kicked off with a Reinventions Live workshop which gathered architecture students, exIvex residents and Rijeka “creatives” for the task of reinventing the exIvex building by coupling the various unexpected potential users with a variety of non-physical contexts. In the second part of the day, Urbanist Platform provided the trip to Lipa Remembers museum and conversation with the exhibition authors and the curator, as well as the trip to the Museum of Contemporary and Modern Art and the conversations with the director and the author of the reconstruction.

The second day started with the opening of the exhibition and the presentations of Reinventions – Delta Hood, beginning with the thought-provoking results of the previous day’s workshop, which sparked off debates concerning the future developments of tourist, military, agricultural and administrative realities. The debates continued with the presentations of the outstanding student works, including the reinventions of exIvex, reinventions of ExportDrvo and the reinvention of Delta Beach. These were followed by the presentation of the “reinvention” of the two-week European architecture students assembly taking place in Rijeka in the summer of 2018 – Re:EASA.

After lunch, DeltaLab was introduced as the new center for urban reinvention, a  platform for research, education and policy development, and Vedran Mimica gave a lecture on Berlage Affairs, reminding us of what a vibrant alternative institution such a center could become. The day ended with the Understading the City roundtable, with Vedran Mimica, Snježana Prijić-Samaržija, Idis Turato, Mia Roth-Čerina, Dinko Peračić and Leo Modrčin discussing the possibilites, challenges, risks and reinventions of education on the contemporary and future urban issues, moderated by Luka Skansi and Nebojša Zelič.

The third day of FW2017 was reserved for discussing the themes and results of the Mare Monti project, an inquiry into the contrasts of Primorje-Gorski Kotar County.

FW2017 ended buzzing with discussion about the futures, of DeltaLab, of the city of Rijeka, of the numerous concepts we once held as familiar which we now recognize to be in the state of strange transformation, of cities, of the planet.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lecture and Seminar with Tamar Meisels and Margaret Moore in Belgrade

Targeted Killing with Drones? Old Arguments, New Technologies
Public Lecture by Tamar Meisels (Tel Aviv University)

Tamar Meisels is a professor of Political Theory in the department of Political Science at Tel Aviv University. She earned her D.Phil. in Politics from Oxford University in 2001. Her primary research and teaching interests include liberal nationalism, territorial rights, and the philosophical questions surrounding war and terrorism. She is the author ofTerritorial Rights (2005, 2009); The Trouble with Terror (Cambridge University Press, 2008), Contemporary Just War: Theory and Practice (Routledge, 2017), and co-editor (with Michael L. Gross) ofSoft war – the Ethics of Unarmed Conflict(Cambridge University Press, 2017).

Date and Time: Friday, October 20, 2017  | 17.00 – 20.00 pm

Venue: University of Belgrade, Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory – Kraljice Natalije 45, 11 000 Belgrade

Introduction: Srđan Prodanović (IFDT)

Moderation: Aleksanadar Fatić (IFDT)

“The question of how to contend with terrorism in keeping with our pre-existing moral and legal commitments now challenges Europe as well as Israel and the United States: how do we apply Just War Theory and International Law to asymmetrical warfare, specifically to our counter terrorism measures? What can the classic moral argument in Just and Unjust Wars teach us about contemporary targeted killings with drones?

I begin with a defense of targeted killing, arguing for the advantages of pin pointed attacks over any alternative measure available for combatting terrorism. Assuming the legitimacy of killing combatants in wartime, I argue, there is nothing wrong, and in fact much that is right, with targeting particular terrorists selected by name, as long as their assassinations can be reasonably expected to reduce terrorist hostilities rather than increase it. Subsequently, I offer some further thoughts and comments on the use of remotely piloted aircrafts to carry out targeted killings, and address the various sources for discomfort with this practice identified by Michael Walzer and others.”

– Tamar Meisels


A Political Theory of Territory
Seminar with Margaret Moore (Queen’s University, Canada)

Margaret Moore is the author of A Political Theory of Territory (OUP 2015) as well as two other books with Oxford University Press, three edited volumes, and more than 50 articles and refereed chapters. She received her doctorate in 1990 from the London School of Economics & Political Science and is a Professor in the Political Studies department at Queen’s University, Canada. She will be taking up the Olof Palme Visiting Professorship at the University of Stockholm in 2018, and is working on a book on natural resources and justice.

Date and Time: Saturday, October 21, 2017  | 15.00 – 20.00 pm

Venue: University of Belgrade, Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory – Kraljice Natalije 45, 11 000 Belgrade

Instroduction: Aleksanadar Fatić (IFDT)

Moderation: Jovan Babić (Faculty for Humanities and Social Sciences, Belgrade)

Speakers: Margaret Moore (Queen’s University), Tamar Meisels (Tel Aviv University), Adriana Zaharijević (IFDT), Marjan Ivković (IFDT), Miloš Ćipranić (IFDT), Igor Cvejić (IFDT), Bojana Simeunović (Filozofski fakultet, Beograd), Olga Nikolić (IFDT), Michal Sladeček (IFDT), Rastko Jovanov (IFDT), Jovica Pavlović (FPN), Jovan Babić (Filozofski fakultet, Beograd), Miloš Marković (Pravni fakultet, Beograd), Aleksandar Fatić (IFDT), Petar Bojanić (IFDT), Srđan Prodanović (IFDT), Mark Losoncz (IFDT).

This talk will defend a certain theory about the appropriate relationship between people, land and the state.  It will explain why her theory of territory is better than its main rivals and the implications of the theory for resource, boundary-drawing, migration, and defensive rights (war). It will elaborate on some of the central claims of her 2015 book.

Between Intellectual and Sensory Reason: Towards an Epistemology of Architecture

Following last year’s course «Philosophy and Architecture: Inequality in the City» which took place at the IUC in Dubrovnik and engaged its participants in topics related to the political and urban implications of social injustice in cities, this year’s summer school’s  focus was on the double bind of architecture as a material practice and as an agent of knowledge production. Philosophers, art historians, theoreticians of architecture, likewise architects joint together in Dubrovnik tackled emerging topics of relationship between architecture and epistemology, their mutual influences and impacts.

Participants:

Prof. Joerg Gleiter, Prof. Snjezana Prijic Samarzija, Prof. Petar Bojanic, Prof. Vladan Djokic, Prof. Zoran Lazovic, Prof. Ludger Schwarte, Prof. Carla Danani, Prof. Giusi Struimmello, Prof. Katharina Borsi, Dr. Sanja Bojanic, Dr. Luka Skansi, Dr. Mateja Kurir Borovčić Kasper Lægring, Roberto Bonturi, Fabiana Sforza, Jelena Radosavljević, Miloš Kostić, Madeleine Jessica Kennedy, Jovana Timotijević, Jovana Stojković, Hana Samaržija, Juan Almarza Anwandter, Stefana Dilova, Mirza Vranjakovic, Julian Franke, Sandra Meireis, Andrea Weigt, Theresa Rauch and Adria Daraban.

Partners and sponsors:

Technical University of Berlin, University of Belgrade, ERSTE Stiftung, German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Croatia.

Host: Inter University Center, Dubrovnik

 

 

Summer school “Between Intellectual and Sensory Reason: Towards an Epistemology of Architecture”

Program
Co-directors:

Snjezana Prijic Samarzija, University of Rijeka

Jörg H. Gleiter, Technical University Berlin

Petar Bojanic, University of Belgrade / CAS SEE University of Rijeka

Vladan Djokic, University of Belgrade

Focal Theme:

Throughout the history of philosophy, architecture has been widely referred to as a metaphor for conscious action and logical construction. For Aristotle the work of the master builder served as a metaphor for his philosophy of action, while Nietzsche used the metaphor of a “shaking tower of concepts” to visualize and make more comprehensible the precarious state of metaphysics. Yet architecture means much more to philosophy and critical thought than what the explanatory use of architectural imagery evokes. It was Kant who went beyond metaphor by claiming “architectonics is the art of systems”. As such, architecture is not only a cultural practice based on knowledge but moreover a cultural practice that serves the production of philosophical knowledge.

This course focuses on the double bind of architecture as a material practice and an agent of knowledge production. We will discuss the importance of architecture in the formation of thought. It will draw attention to architecture as a cultural practice between intellectual reason and sensual reason. It was Nietzsche who already emphasized the close interrelation between philosophy and architecture and insisted on the philosopher’s need for appropriate spaces for thinking. He held that after the death of God “we need some recognition of what above all is lacking in our big cities: quiet and wide, expansive places for reflection. Places with long, high-ceilinged cloisters for bad or all too sunny weather”.

Participants:

Prof. Joerg Gleiter, Prof. Snjezana Prijic Samarzija, Prof. Petar Bojanic, Prof. Vladan Djokic, Prof. Zoran Lazovic, Prof. Ludger Schwarte, Prof. Carla Danani, Prof. Giusi Struimmello, Prof. Katharina Borsi, Dr. Sanja Bojanic, Dr. Luka Skansi, Dr. Mateja Kurir Borovčić Kasper Lægring, Roberto Bonturi, Fabiana Sforza, Jelena Radosavljević, Miloš Kostić, Madeleine Jessica Kennedy, Jovana Timotijević, Jovana Stojković, Hana Samaržija, Juan Almarza Anwandter, Stefana Dilova, Mirza Vranjakovic, Julian Franke, Sandra Meireis, Andrea Weigt, Theresa Rauch and Adria Daraban.

Seminars will start at 10.00 am in the morning with open end in the evening.

In order to leave enough time for the intellectual exchange presentations shall be limited to 20 minutes (students MA/BA) and 30 minutes all others.

The presentations will be followed by 30 minutes respectively 40 minutes of discussion.

An individually assigned moderator/commentator will help to guide through the discussions.

Timetable
Monday, 11th September 2017
10.00-11.00  | Welcome and registrations

Venue: IUC – Ul. don Frana Bulica 4, 20000, Dubrovnik

How to get there? 

11.00-12.00  | Welcome address of Directors of the Course

Presentation of all participants; setting the daily schedule

Time Title Lecturer
12.00

13.00

Opening session: Introduction to the course Prof. Joerg Gleiter
13.00

14.30

Lunch
14.30

15.30

Spaces of Reflection – where does philosophy take place? Prof. Ludger Schwarte

 

Comments: Prof. Snjezana Prijic Samarzija

15.30

16.30

Pages for thinking. From Corviale to “sensible wisdom” …. in a too short step. Prof. Carla Danani

 

Comments: Prof. Giusi Struimmello

16.30

17.00

Pause
17.00

18.00

Epistemic Implications of Neuroarchitecture Hana Samarzija

 

Comments: Prof. Carla Danani

Tuesday, 12th September 2017
Time Title Lecturer
10.00

11.00

The Acts of Project(ion) Prof. Petar Bojanic

 

Comments: Prof. Joerg Gleiter

11.00

12.00

A new rational aesthetic: notes on the culture of space Dr. Luka Skansi

 

Comments: Prof. Ludger Schwarte

12.00

13.00

Architecture, Space and Alienation: between Adorno and Lefebvre Dr. Mateja Kurir Borovcic

 

Comments: Dr. Luka Skansi

13.00

15.00

Lunch
15.00

16.00

Drawing the Knowledge of Urbanism Prof. Katharina Borsi

 

Comments: Prof. Joerg Gleiter

16.00

16.15

Pause
16.15

17.15

Knowledge Fields: Between Scientific and Design-Based Knowledge Prof. Vladan Djokic

 

Comments: Prof. Ludger Schwarte

17.15

18.15

Representations of the fragmentary in architecture Adria Daraban

 

Comments: Sandra Meireis

Wednesday, 13th September 2017
14.00

15.30

Reading Laboratory
Time Title Lecturer
15.30

16.30

Between Being and Becoming: towards a metaphysical reading of architectural signs Juan Almarza Anwandter

 

Comments: Prof. Joerg Gleiter

16.30

17.30

Nietzsche’s thoughts about Architecture Mirza Vranjakovic

 

Comments: Prof. Giusi Struimmello

17.30

18.00

Pause
18.00

19.00

Diagrams in Architecture: Agents of knowledge production? Julian Franke

 

Comments: Prof. Joerg Gleiter

Thursday, 14th September 2017
Time Title Lecturer
10.00

10.45

Mythologisations of Contemporary Belgradian Architecture Prof. Zoran Lazovic

 

Comments: Milos Kostic

10.45

11.30

Self-Managing Socialism and Urban Planning – The Case Study of General Plan of Belgrade 1972 Jelena Radosavljevic

 

Comments: Prof. Vladan Djokic

11.30

12.00

Pause
12.00

13.00

Exhibitions as Philosophy? Madeleine Kennedy

 

Comments: Hana Samarzija

13.00

14.30

Lunch
14.30

15.30

Exploring Ideas in your Senses. The capacity of imagination after Immanuel Kant explored in Oswald M. Ungers “City Metaphors” Andrea Weigt

 

Comments: Prof. Carla Danani

15.30

16.00

Pause
16.00

17.00

Semiotics of Architectural: Detail between Rationalization and Representation of Architecture Milos Kostic

 

Comments: Prof. Giusi Struimmello

17.00

18.00

The Perception of Space on the Base of Atmospheres Theresa Rauch

 

Comments: Prof. Joerg Gleiter

Friday, 15th September 2017
Time Title Lecturer
10.00

11.00

Nelson Goodman, Exemplification and Critiques of Modernist Architecture Kasper Laegring

 

Comments: Sandra Meireis

11.00

12.00

“Abandoning Home” – aporia of displacement Jovana Timotijevic

 

Comments: Prof. Joerg Gleiter

12.00

12.30

Pause
12.30

13.30

The Presence in Public Space Stefana Dilova

 

Comments: Madeleine Kennedy

13.30

14.00

Closing remarks, distribution of certificates

 

Gruia Bădescu

Sites of memory and the criminalization of authoritarian pasts: Interrogating Goli Otok in a regional and transnational frame.

“A repertoire of transitional justice practices has been mobilized in the last decades in states that experienced various incarnations of authoritarian regimes, from Latin America to Central and Eastern Europe. From trials to incriminating reports, from lustration to political declarations, these past regimes have been the object of diverse practices and discourses of criminalization. One important aspect has been the memorialization of sites of political violence, which has been mobilized by an array of actors to suit particular narratives of criminalizing past regimes. In this global context, the debates surrounding the memorialization of Goli Otok in Croatia mirror a number of processes which occurred elsewhere, while deeply connected to the specificity of memory politics in Croatia and former Yugoslavia. A political prison for mainly socialist detainees after the Tito-Stalin split, Goli Otok has been marginal to local memorialization practices, but has recently became a locus of initiatives and narratives fitting different visions and agendas. In this presentation, based on ongoing research, I scrutinize strategies and motivations of a variety of actors, the idiosyncrasies of the Yugoslav and Croatian situation, while situating it in the larger context of Central and Eastern European regional criminalization of communism and in the transnational circulation of practices between memory regions. I discuss how perspectives of place and memorialization of sites contribute to our understanding of criminalization, and how the entanglements of memories and actors function at a variety of scales, reflecting on the spatialization of multidirectional memories.”


Gruia Bădescu’s research and practice bridge the spatial and the social, with a particular interest in how interventions in urban space relate to societal and political processes of dealing with a difficult past. After his BA in Geography and European Studies from Middlebury College and his MSc in City Design and Social Science from the Cities Programme at the LSE, he worked in urban design and integrated urban development in Romania, Georgia, Armenia and Moldova. He later conducted his PhD research at the Centre for Urban Conflicts Research, Department of Architecture, University of Cambridge, where he examined the relationship between the reconstruction of cities after war and the process of coming to terms with the past, with a focus on Belgrade and Sarajevo. In 2015-2016, Gruia was a Departmental Lecturer in Human Geography at the University of Oxford, after which he embarked on a research project in Chile with an AHRC-Labex grant, exploring processes of memorialization of sites used for political violence during the military dictatorship and their transnational dimension, linking them with South-East Europe. Gruia joined CAS at Rijeka to continue his research around the debates on memorializing the site of Goli Otok, as well as to explore the heritage and memory dimension of urban transformations in Rijeka within the context of the European Capital of Culture.